On Oct 8, 7:46*am, PD wrote:
On Oct 8, 12:29*am, Koobee Wublee wrote:









On Oct 7, 2:25 pm, PD wrote:

On 10/7/2011 3:53 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
The whole business of accelerating expansion of your universe is
believe in the Chandrasekhar limit which itself is made up of several
dubious assumptions.

You're nuts, KW. There's nothing in Hubble's OBSERVATIONAL MEASUREMENTS
that depends on the Chandrasekhar limit at all. It's just a plot of
redshift (measured with diffraction gratings) against distance (measured
with standard candles).

The most two important hypotheses that claim an accelerated expansion
of your universe a

**** *Hubble expansion law

** *z = k r

Where

** *z = red shift
** *k = constant
** *r = distance

Note that this is an empirical law. That is, it is an *observational*
relationship between measured quantities.
Note also that this relationship, if it holds, indicates neither
acceleration or deceleration.
If there were a variation from this law, then it would indicate
acceleration or deceleration *observationally*, just as the observed
relationship between distance and time for a track runner would tell
you whether the track runner is running at constant speed or speeding
up or slowing down.



This law was never tested especially at such high-z distances. *What
if Hubble’s law is not linear as claimed but goes like the following?

** *z^2 = k^2 r

Why, then, you would have an indication of acceleration of the
universe. Do you see why?




Sam is right, KW. You are a *profoundly* stupid person.

You may have been talented and competent at one point in your life. To
that, I would ask, what the hell happened?







At the distance observable within Hubble’s technology, the law seems
to behave in the first order. *However, at distances further out, it
would diverge from the linear model of near field. *The law above fits
the observation without supporting such a ridiculous claim of
accelerated expansion of your universe. *shrug

**** *Chandrasekhar limit

Chandrasekhar fudged this up. *So, in a stroke of a pen, he was able
to stop the mass gain of a companion star cannibalizing on its hapless
neighbor. *Why don’t you worship Chandrasekhar as a god instead?
shrug

****

So, a college physics professor is ignorant of any of these, and
Einstein Dingleberries are as just as stupid and getting dumber as
usual. *What else is new? *sigh and shrug

You got to be nuts to believe in all the assumptions that manifest the
Chandrasekhar limit.

You are out of your mind to dictate how your universe behaves by
believing in the Chandrasekhar limit.